So does this mean I have to get a Twitter now?

We were told today in lecture, during the "Future of Journalism (?)" panel (I applied the dubious question mark here, because some people say journalism as a career is in a crisis, while others say they are optimistic about its future), that, as aspiring journalists, we should all be "becoming experts" on a topic that interests us, and writing beat reports through blogs.

I saw many heads in the 300+ student lecture bow over their little desks, hands furiously scribbling. Hmmm... Now everyone's going to go home and start a blog.

"You write a story for a beat every day, and you see what other beat reporters are writing, and you keep up with it, and you do this for 2 years and see what happens."

I am guessing the every week-and-a-half posts I've been doing just won't suffice if I want to be a real pencil.

That means I have to get a Twitter, right? If I want to keep up with the times? (Seriously, though, The Times actually has a Twitter and it's a pretty important part of their future as a news organ, along with Facebook.)

But guests of the panel, which included Jennifer Preston (Social Media Editor of the NYTimes), Adam Ellick (writer/multimedia for NYTimes), Edward Felsenthal (editor of the Daily Beast), and Jay Rosen (NYU Journalism professor/"blogger"), also emphasized the point that bad journalism starts with lacking some of the basics:

1. Get your ass off your chair and get on the street.

2. Talk to people face-to-face. Preferably not PR people (which is what Twitter and Facebook are mostly used for).

But of course, my favorite quote from today's panels (I <3 journalism panels):

"If you want to be a real journalist then you better know what the hell you're talking about. And if you don't know what you're talking about, then don't talk."
-Jay Rosen



Most recent article in WSN: http://nyunews.com/life/2009/nov/29/galleries/